Since the oil price crash of 2014, there has been strong momentum for cutting fossil fuel subsidies, with a number of emerging market countries taking action to align gasoline and diesel prices with the global market. The reforms have been well overdue and will hopefully continue, as lifting subsidies has the potential to reduce wasteful spending and increase government revenue. Most importantly, bringing retail prices in line with the global market can help limit oil demand growth, improving energy security worldwide.

Scrapping subsidies is an important and positive action taken by the Mexican authorities, but the move has spurred widespread consternation among consumers and will bring about more unintended consequences.

Mexico is the latest country to get rid of fuel subsidies. This is an important and positive action taken by the Mexican authorities, but the move has spurred widespread consternation among consumers and will bring about more unintended consequences. The price deregulation, which began at the beginning of 2017 and has forced motorists to pay 20 percent more for fuel, has sparked protests throughout the country. That should hardly be surprising, given that the price increase was sharp and subsidies are typically popular with consumers. Governments worldwide have dragged their feet with reforming fuel prices because of worries of backlash and social unrest.

While the subsidy reform was badly needed, it comes at a difficult time for Mexico’s economy. The liberalization will be rolled out in different stages throughout the year, and will increase transportation costs, hurting the likes of farmers, taxi drivers and middle-class consumers, while also possibly adding to inflation. The Mexican president, Enrique Pena Nieto, on Wednesday defended the measure, saying that not taking steps for reform now would lead to more pain in the future, but his rhetoric is unlikely to calm angry consumers.

“Government officials downplayed the immediate negative effects of liberalizing prices in order to get people on board for reform.”

“Government officials downplayed the immediate negative effects of liberalizing prices in order to get people on board for reform,” said Lisa Viscidi, director of the energy, climate change and extractive industries program at the Inter-American Dialogue, told The Fuse. “But it comes at a bad time politically and economically for the country. The government is unpopular because of corruption scandals and the economy is doing poorly with PEMEX’s production falling and the value of the peso losing value.”

The Mexican peso hit a record low versus the dollar on Wednesday, a development that will make imports more expensive for the country. Government corruption, declining oil output, and higher retail prices are occurring at the same time Donald Trump will take office in the U.S. Given Trump’s attempts to keep U.S. firms from moving activity to Mexico, the country is worried it could lose business or see trade take a hit.

Demand slows as economy struggles, prices rise

Mexico relies heavily on U.S. refiners for gasoline, importing some 450,000 b/d from its northern neighbor in late 2016, reflecting how costly fuel is for Mexico, particularly with the decline of the peso.

The country currently consumes roughly 1.95 million barrels per day (mbd). Demand fell by approximately 60,000 b/d in 2016 and is expected to decline slightly again this year, particularly now that consumers will pay higher retail prices. Because of its lack of refining capacity, Mexico has to import almost half of its refined products, with about 950,000 b/d coming from the U.S. In fact, the country relies heavily on U.S. refiners for gasoline, importing some 450,000 b/d from its northern neighbor in late 2016, reflecting how costly fuel is for Mexico, particularly with the decline of the peso.

Even though Mexico is opening its upstream assets to foreign players in an effort to reverse its industry’s fortunes and help the economy, forecasts show that output is expected to drop in the near term. Mexico joined OPEC and other non-OPEC countries in coordinated cuts at the end of last year in order to rebalance fundamentals and push up prices. For the most part, Mexico won’t have any difficulty meeting its commitment of a 100,000 b/d cut since natural declines are set to pull down production anyway. The graphic below (via the International Energy Agency) shows how much the country’s oil industry is struggling. By the end of 2017, production is expected to be just above 2.2 mbd, down more than 20 percent from the beginning of 2014.

Curbing oil demand growth

In the past couple of years, countries such as Indonesia, Malaysia, Ghana, China, and a number of OPEC producers, including Saudi Arabia, took necessary steps to reform subsidies. Low oil prices and soaring budget deficits have provided motivation to scrap the status quo. Despite short-term pain from liberalizing prices, as seen currently in Mexico, longer-run benefits of curbing oil demand growth will emerge.

Stay Informed

Subscribe to our newsletter today!

The Fuse is an energy news and analysis site supported by Securing America’s Future Energy. The views expressed here are those of individual contributors and do not necessarily represent the views of the organization.

Issues in Focus

Safety Standards for Crude-By-Rail Shipments

A series of accidents in North America in recent years have raised concerns regarding rail shipments of crude oil. Fatal accidents in Lynchburg, Virginia, Lac-Megantic, Quebec, Fayette County, West Virginia, and (most recently) Culbertson, Montana have prompted public outcry and regulatory scrutiny.

2014 saw an all-time record of 144 oil train incidents in the U.S.—up from just one in 2009—causing a total of more than $7 million in damage.

The spate of crude-by-rail accidents has emerged from the confluence of three factors. First is the massive increase in oil movements by rail, which has increased more than three-fold since 2010. Second is the inadequate safety features of DOT-111 cars, particularly those constructed prior to 2011, which account for roughly 70 percent of tank cars on U.S. railroads. Third is the high volatility of oil produced from the Bakken and other shale formations, which makes this crude more prone towards combustion.

Of these three, rail car safety standards is the factor over which regulators can exert the most control. After months of regulatory review, on May 1, 2015, the White House and the Department of Transportation unveiled the new safety standards. The announcement also coincided with new tank car standards in Canada—a critical move, since many crude by rail shipments cross the U.S.-Canadian border. In the words DOT, the new rule:

Since the rule was announced, Republicans in Congress sought to roll back the provision calling for an advanced breaking system, following concerns from the rail industry that such an upgrade would be unnecessary and could cost billions of dollars. The advanced braking systems are required to be in place by 2021.

Democrats in Congress have argued that the new rules are insufficient to mitigate the danger. Senator Maria Cantwell (D-WA) and Senator Tammy Baldwin (D-WI) both issued statements arguing that the rules were insufficient and the timelines for safety improvements were too long.

The current industry standard car, the CPC-1232, came into usage in October 2011. These cars have half inch thick shells (marginally thicker than the DOT-111 7/16 inch shells) and advanced valves that are more resilient in the event of an accident. However, these newer cars were involved in the derailments and explosions in Virginia and West Virginia within the past year, raising questions about the validity of replacing only the DOT-111s manufactured before 2011.

Before the rule was finalized, early reports indicated that the rule submitted to the White House by the Department of Transportation has proposed a two-stage phase-out of the current fleet of railcars, focusing first on the pre-2011 cars, then the current standard CPC-1232 cars. In the final rule, DOT mandated a more aggressive timeline for retrofitting the CPC-1232 cars, imposing a deadline of April 1, 2020 for non-jacketed cars.

Oops!

We weren't able to sign you up for our newsletter.Please check your email address and try again.

DataSpotlight

The recent oil production boom in the United States, while astounding, has created a misleading narrative that the United States is no longer dependent on oil imports. Reports of surging domestic production, calls for relaxation of the crude oil export ban, labels of “Saudi America,” and the recent collapse in oil prices have created a perception that the United States has more oil than it knows what to do with.

This view is misguided. While some forecasts project that the United States could become a self-sufficient oil producer within the next decade, this remains a distant prospect. According to the April 2015 Short Term Energy Outlook, total U.S. crude oil production averaged an estimated 9.3 million barrels per day in March, while total oil demand in the country is over 19 million barrels per day.

This graphic helps illustrate the regional variations in crude oil supply and demand. North America, Europe, and Asia all run significant production deficits, with the Middle East, Africa, Latin America, and Former Soviet Union are global engines of crude oil supply.